Pentax K-3 Review

Pentax has a long history of being a little different from the 'big two' SLR makers, introducing features that would normally be found on cameras costing quite a bit more, such as weatherproofing and larger, pentaprism optical viewfinders. It's also created some products that seemingly came out of left field, such as the Q7 and K-01 mirrorless cameras.

The Pentax name is now owned by Ricoh (not a company scared to try new ideas itself), which has continued the tradition of innovation, no better illustrated than with the concept of a digital SLR that has an anti-aliasing effect that can be turned on at the push of a button (Nikon recently patented a concept that accomplishes the same thing, but in a different manner). However, it hasn't accomplished this by having the filter just drop into place. No, Pentax is using its sensor-shift image stabilizer to deliberately move the sensor during the exposure, slightly blurring the image to mimic the effects of an optical low-pass filter. Not only can this be turned on and off, Pentax is also offering two 'intensities' to choose from.

The name of the camera with this breakthrough feature: the Pentax K-3. This camera takes the rugged design of the K-5 II / K-5 IIs that came before it and bumps up the resolution, improves the AF system, speeds up the processor, and enlarges the LCD and viewfinder.

Pentax K-3 key features

24.4 megapixel APS-C CMOS sensor

Sensor-shift image stabilization with rotational compensation

Anti-aliasing 'simulator' (camera has no optical low-pass filter)

SAFOX 11 TTL autofocus system (27-point, 25 of which are cross-type)

3.2-inch LCD with 3:2 aspect ratio and 1.037k dots

Pentaprism optical viewfinder with 0.95x magnification, 100% coverage

8.3 fps continuous shooting

1920 x 1080 video recording (60i, 30p, 24p)

Dual SD card slots

Headphone, microphone ports

USB 3.0 support

At first glance, the K-3 may look like the K-5 II with a higher resolution sensor, but that's far from the whole story. Ricoh has improved upon the K-5 II in every way, with special attention given to video recording. On the photo side, there's the new sensor (probably from Sony), improved autofocus and metering systems, larger optical viewfinder and LCD, and of course, the selectable AA filter. Performance-wise, the K-3 shoots at 8.3 fps, up from 7.0 fps on the K-5 II.

The K-3 uses a new SAFOX 11 autofocus system, which has 27 points (25 of which are cross-type).

The metering system has been dramatically improved, going from 77-segment on the K-5 to 86,000 RGB pixels on the K-3.

Movie lovers will find all kinds of new features. There's now a dedicated 'red button' for quick recording, mic and headphone inputs, and control over audio level. The frame rate has also been increased to 1080/60i, up from 1080/25p on the K-5 II.

Two features that photo and video enthusiasts will like are dual SD card slots and support for USB 3.0 (the K-3 is only the second camera to support this). Build quality remains top-notch, with the K-3 having a rugged, weatherproof body.

The biggest change to the K-3 isn't a feature at all, but it will probably garner the most discussion. There is now a prominent 'Ricoh' logo on the back of the camera, just below the LCD. Ricoh has stated that Pentax is a 'brand' now, similar to 'Lumix' on Panasonic cameras. We're curious to see how the very loyal Pentax audience will react to this change. With this in mind, it's interesting also to note that the K-3 gains the multi-area white balance feature (which aims to correct for different light sources in the same image) that we've seen on previous Ricohs.

Anti-aliasing simulator

One of the most interesting new features on the K-3 is its 'anti-aliasing simulator'. Like the K-5 IIs the camera has no anti-aliasing filter; this improves resolution, but with the trade-off of an increased risk of moiré. Pentax is using the K-3's sensor-shift IS system to simulate the effect of having the filter.

The AA simulator works by applying 'microscopic vibrations to the image sensor unit at the sub-pixel level during exposure', according to Pentax. Simply put, these tiny vibrations cause just enough blur to give the same effect as having an optical anti-aliasing filter. There are two options to choose from - Pentax calls them Mode 1 and Mode 2 - which we assume increases the 'strength' of the virtual filter. Pentax says that the AA simulator is most effective when the shutter speed is under 1/1000 sec.

Kit options and pricing

The K-3 is sold in three kits (at least in the US). The body-only option has a recommended price of $1299 / £1099, while a kit with the DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 WR lens has a list price of $1699 / £1449. The third kit is the 'premium silver edition' shown above, of which only 2000 will be made. This model includes a special battery grip and strap (but no lens), available from select retailers for $1599 / £1399.

If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital
Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help
you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based
on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review
before coming to your own conclusions.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should
be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally
A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2014 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Comments

You complain about the default jpeg rendering but you can customize the jpeg profile in camera to get most any look that you want. If you care about jpeg learn how to use the camera to get what you want.

In your final conclusion you say that its only good enough for someone already with Pentax, but if you're a Nikon shooter coming from the d300 does this camera not answer every argument against the d7100.

You also say its not a camera for traveling light, which seems to miss the whole Pentax design philosophy. If you want the best IQ in a small but well handling package, with all metal build and lenses that are smaller than many m43 equivalents. You'd travel with this camera.

This camera outspecs the d7100 in every way, and gets rave reviews for handling, how can it score lower?

" If you want the best IQ in a small but well handling package, with all metal build and lenses that are smaller than many m43 equivalents you'd travel with this camera."

Absolutely and well said. The K-3 and the Pentax DA15mm Ltd., the DA20-40mm Ltd., and the DA70mm Ltd. is vastly capable of excellent quality travel shooting in as small and easy to use a kit as you are likely to find. The weather resistance of the K-3 and the 20-40mm zoom alone will allow many great pictures that other options would simply leave behind. The K-3 and its Ltd. lens group is totally a travel camera if one bothers to travel with a DSLR at all instead of the boring compact or cell phone.

. . . and (I intended to conclude before interrupted), I would pick the K-3 and exactly that trio of lenses -- the Pentax 15, 20-40, and 70 Ltd's -- if what I was after was not merely travel documentary, but top-shelf IQ in all of my shots, in a small kit that I could easily keep on my person at all times.

Still same soft studio comparison. So Im puzzling by that. :\ Maybe its the lens or so. Yeah I think AA simulator seems not important to me. I shoot mostly raw and can fix moire easily. Its pretty impressive camera, I had high hope that K-3 will deliver very good but it seems this review shows this high hope really fade to me. I guess it is to do with Ricoh using different incamera software is not as good as old Pentax camera use to be much better I guess. AF seems let down which is a pity but not all camera are perfect except Canon are so good with AF for some reason.

I have no experience with Pentax and I'm a m4/3 user, so I don't have a "dog in the hunt," but there seems to be a disconnect between the narrative and final rating of 83%/Gold? I must have missed a page or two.

Really getting to the point where I don't give any value to their final verdict.

Judging by the price rises on Amazon (according to the ads on the bottom of the article) and the "out of stock" headings on GearShop (a sponsor) the K3 must be quite popular with the public. The cheapest price on Amazon is only discounted 14 per cent from its $1299 list, up about a hundred dollars in the time since the pre-review was published.

Strangely you have set this in semi-pro like the K-5, but the K-5 II(s) is in mid level. This is a direct competitor for de Nikon D7100 and de Canon 70D, which are in mid level. Maybe semi-pro should start a bit lower. K-3 D7100 70D A77 OMD-EM1 , X-pro1.

So AF is up to date but the lenses aren't? Great con people. But There are also sigma and tamron alternatives out there for Pentax and not all pentax lenses are slow (and not all of them are even meant to be fast). Guess you needed a replacement for de no longer missing dedicated movie button ;).

This is to be expected. Oddball brand, oddball review. Same reason why most people will choose Bose over B&W, Honda over Alfa Romeo, etc. The masses can only trust what the majority wants. The meek wants bland generic stuff that shows a bigger range of models and market share.... but no soul.In the end, it's best for us Pentax shooters: we get to have fun with beautiful products that for the most part work incredibly well and are compact to boot. No other company (other than the germans) makes lenses as beautiful as the limiteds.

I could see that one coming. Of course you have a point. And maybe, if I was a pro, I would also shoot CaNikon, mainly because of their advanced flash system. But even the most "unreliable" and eccentric photo products survive their shelf life, as a high majority of the population here at DPreview, will trade their equipment within 1-5 years. That is mostly how this and other websites survive.

Only boys of Canikon need autofocus because they operate their cameras on automatic. Who cares about the video module. I have a camcorder that costs U$20.000 . What interests me is the quality of the image , the sharpness . In terms of image quality, the only camera capable of rivalling with my Pentax K- 3 is my PhaseOne. Sorry DPR but you review are tendentious .

Nevertheless, Phase One produces outstanding IQ, so if "wealthy mega dude" chooses the K-3 as the only smaller-sized alternative, that says something good.

In the brief time I used the K-3 for real-life shooting I thought it produced beautiful output - more pleasing than the K-5 IIs before it. But either camera with one of the better Pentax lenses produces output that's more dimensional and alive than a typical, flatter-looking Canon or Nikon shot.

Sometimes Pentax will make you work harder for your shot, but when you do, the payoff can be worth it.

I only wanted to show that I can be as cynical as the dpr is.Yes! I do have a PhaseOne . No! I don't need a DSLR for video. Yes! I do use Pentax on streets for portraiture and to shoot indoor events ? I think mauritsvw got my point.

It seems like an ergonomical winner, but some recent developments I wouldn't wish to be without, specifically live view magnification for focusing manually(didn't see it mentioned so I assume it does not have it) as well as a tiltable LCD. Macro is just a lot easier with those two things.

Haha, this review tells more about the reviewer than the camera.The last sentence and the obvious unlust (german word, but you can get the meaning) to finally come out with it speak for itself ;)Not that someone would rely on such a review, but the one from Imaging resource is at least a joy to read and very informative. But - whatever.

Equally, making sure we understood what the AA filter mode does and doesn't do, and trying to find examples that demonstrate its effects took quite a lot of work. (As did developing the variation of our comparison tool to enable the differences to be shown side-by-side).

The lag before he had a chance to start the review was regrettable, but we did our best to test and assess the K-3 as thoroughly as possible. We probably could have thrown something together to stop the complaints, but instead we tried to give the K-3 the respect it deserved. It's disappointing that this effort isn't more apparent to you.

I am well aware of what it takes write an in-depth review, and also the nuances to do so in order to conduct autofocus comparisons. I invite you to read here, which I wrote in its entirety: http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/hd-pentax-da-55-300mm/autofocus.html Just that one page is what I'm pointing you to, but if you still feel I am not competent enough to judge your effort, I invite you to read that entire review.

I acknowledge that it took longer than you thought. The above took me 3 months as opposed to the 1 I thought it would. I also acknowledge the delayed start, much to my chagrin and dismay.

But what I still don't understand is the 70D and the D7100 really don't compare to the K-3 and yet to the uninformed and easily impressionable, the perception you've reinforced is that the K-3 barely matches and ultimately lags the other two, when that is absolute garbage. "Pentax D400" or "Pentax 7DII," as you ignored.

Richard, don't be disappointed. I and I'm sure many others did not get the impression that you had rushed to publish this at all. You may not have reported what some people want to hear. But that doesn't say a thing about your review. It only says something about those people's agenda.

Haha oh wow...so lets see this review actually gets its own widget in regards to AA simulation as well as not only 1 test run of AF but two (some Canikon bodies get zero AF test runs). MFT camera's have different anti-shock or EFC-like modes now and shutter-shock has been mentioned but never officially tested like the AA filter here. It seems the reviewer made significant effort to try many different lenses in AF testing...had Canikon failed with a kit lens however we would have never heard the end of it, Pentax however can still manage gold. Pentax fans...I would make fun of them, but I feel all DSLR users will become crusty old whiners eventually in the face of mirrorless.

P.S. Dpreview should just do more standardized AF testing across all cameras...that might be appreciated regardless of brand...although perhaps based on what I see in the Performance review, less appreciated by Pentax.

I kind of expected it since they 'discounted' the anti-aliasing feature in the middle of the review process... I think the feature should be marked higher simply because it is the first and only of its kind and it works well. The fact that DPR couldn't create enough scenarios for a Moire to kick in doesn't mean that the feature is worse or worth less points

Ok, so they didn't find value in the AA simulator. Truth be told, I've never used it once myself. But that doesn't take away it's genius and intrigue towards professional shooters who do encounter moire a lot (wedding, fashion, etc.), especially now with its auto-1-shot-bracket function.

But what about pure raw photographic capability of the camera? Build quality should have been maxed out. Bar none. Squeeze a D7100 and you can hear the plastic creak. K-3? I feel like I could bang nails in with it.

Performance? And the D7100's class-leading 6 RAW buffer does better.

Ergonomics and Handling, again should have been maxed out. The only reason the K-3 hasn't sold more than it already has is because it's hard to play with in person (Pentax's fault, not DPR's). But ask anyone who held both? Pentax ergonomics are best in the business.

Not recommended for: those looking to travel light"

Please - with the Limited lenses the Pentax system isn't much bigger than M4/3 offerings, w/ better IQ.

I guess color truly is subjective. I don't own a Pentax, but the colors from the JPEGs in this review are extremely attractive. Dpreview loves Olympus's color response (I'm a former owner of the OMD EM5) and always felt Olympus was highly artificial looking.

I agree, I have always preferred the colours I get from My Pentax system over the Nikon I have. They are somewhat richer in rendition and more pleasing to the eye, even from RAW. The Nikon just cannot match. Even some friends of mine who use CaNikons are very envious of how Pentax can produce blues. They even call it "Pentax Blue". Mind you Pentax still struggles with reds, almost overcooking them, but don't most DSLR's?

Sorry... I don't get what's wrong with saying exactly that. I take that to mean that this is a fine camera but one that perhaps doesn't offer enough really different features to bother dumping another large DSLR system from one of the "big two." I have no horse in the race as I have a m4/3 camera with just the lens that it came with. If I had a few grand in Nikon or Canon gear though I might be thinking twice two before changing to a different brand system, even if it offered s few advantages. It would have to offer a lot for me to sell what I have at a loss. Then again, if I was upgrading from a P&S camera, I might seriously consider it over Canon/Nikon gear.

Frankly, I have never seen this site explicitly tell a reader NOT to buy a product if they own another product.

Odd to say the least.

Furthermore, the "AF test" they use to evaluate the K-3 ( a frame by frame sharpness analysis of a subject moving toward the camera at a high rate of speed ) is NOT used to evaluate the Nikon D7100s AF results.

Pulled out on its own like that, that sentence doesn't have the emphasis quite where I intended it.

I was trying to answer the question 'should I buy a K-3' for: a Pentax owner, someone without a significant attachment to another system and for someone who already has some nice non-Pentax lenses. The answers to which are yes, maybe and probably not.

What it's missing is the stress on the degree of commitment to another system: if you've got a couple-of-generations-old Canon Rebel, it's worth considering - if you own a 70-200 F2.8 for a different mount, it's probably not.

I've amended the statement to: 'For Pentax owners, it's well worth upgrading to, and good enough to make Pentax worth considering if you have no serious commitments to another system.'

But purchasing advice must be consumer´s conclusion, because I would say: If you want to enter into a system with better colour reproduction, specially if you come from the flatness of Canikon colour, jump ship to Pentax right away. Every living system have their own pros to jump in.

1) Composition Adjust giving a shift effect on all lens mounted? (unique to pentax)2)Fast stabilized primes which is hard to get on canikon but also available on some m4/3 bodys and sonys.3)Horizon correction (corrects for holding the camera a little squint)4)AA filter simulation (great of your shooting fabrics among other stuff)5)Stabilized video (sorry.. not in the k3 sadly as its switched to a software version but the k5 works great for this)

This is just what one small feature of the camera can offer people, never mind things like the gapless 3:2 display which is wonderful and other upgrades the k3 has.

I'm not saying its a perfect system as a whole (Id love grouping in wireless P-ttl) but its a dam better camera than what you can get from canon or nikon atm for a similar price and much cheaper for a proper weather sealed system.

Very true. Hopefully this begins with the new * ~70-200 currently on the roadmap (and I suspect it will).

Currently the best AF performance is had with older Pentax screw-drive lenses (primes, especially), a few Tamron and Sigma lenses (notably their 70-200/2.8s), and (to a slightly lesser extent) the DA*300. Some otherwise wonderful lenses like the DA*50-135 (which DPR appropriately threw out of the running) are absolutely atrocious for fast-moving action.

I appreciate DPR's hard work, but they should actually re-test the AF-C with single-point AF using one of the above lenses or an FA135, FA*85, possibly FA77 or DA70 (which may perform differently in this situation), or even an F or FA*300/4.5.

Nevertheless, Pentax' next move should be to release some more current, longer lenses with faster AF.

I shoot sports with the K5 & K3. I use the Pentax DA* 60-250/F4 SDM (for rain and where I need a wide zoom range) and the Sigma 70-200/F2.8 HSM II (for LL and for where I want the max shallow DOF effect).

The Pentax is satisfactory, but the Sigma is faster for approaching subjects.

Yes, I'll really miss those interruptions in the Comments of unrelated products!

Buying into the fourth of four major DSLR systems [Does Sony still count as a DSLR maker?] requires a buyer to see some specific virtues in that/those products. And this creates a desire not to see those virtues go unheralded. But when you combine this situation with an underdog status or feelings, behavior can begin to look a bit "weird" at times.

I don't think it's a need to justify their purchase so much as a desire not to see the little guy squished, or the company quelled, when they've found it has great merit, unique usefulness, and even drives some of the innovation in the industry. Quite often what we see as the best choice (and for many, it actually is the best choice) gets taken away. That's why, for example, many were happy to see T-mobile stick around.

> I don't think it's a need to justify their purchase so much as a desire not to see the little guy squished, or the company quelled, when they've found it has great merit, unique usefulness, and even drives some of the innovation in the industry.